Scientifically, there should be a single consistent standard.

As long as that is true, it's fine.

Cuomo's standard was neither consistent nor scientific. That is a clear first amendment violation.

Gorsuch is SCIENTIFICALLY RIGHT HERE.

If people can't admit that, then they are allowing their biases to show.

https://t.co/WiYtikuOXi
This on the other hand is 100% BS.

Not a single scientist I know supports this double standard. The best ones know that the type ofvenue is irrelevant... Only the size and # of people matter.

https://t.co/YmjlopdbD3
In short, it is the LEFT here using religious bias to promote an antiscientific standard and allowing the State to violate Rights.

The Liberals and CJJR should be ashamed.
Another good thread here.

A consistent standard would have passed constitutional muster.

https://t.co/j3pxMH8Mz4
And, always read @JoshMBlackman...

https://t.co/dr2GZGvhx9
"Robert's South Bay concurrence is no longer a super-precedent...courts had cited it 114 times in the past six months. But Diocese will likely be the last citation. Courts can no longer look to the Chief's opinion as the definitive statement for pandemic cases."
"I don't think the majority formally repudiates South Bay. Indeed, the Court distinguishes NY's orders from CA order. But going forward, Diocese will be controlling standard. And, when a COVID case reaches the Court on certiorari, I suspect the Chief will join the conservatives."
And God Bless Gorsuch for this. This is something worth giving thanks for.
And more from Gorsuch here:

https://t.co/9D19uILWSt
". . . the State has effectively sought to ban all traditional forms of worship in affected "zones" whenever the Governor decrees and for as long as he chooses. Nothing in Jacobson purported to address, let alone approve, such serious and long-lasting intrusions..."
The arguments between Gorsuch and Roberts are fascinating here. I think ultimately, Roberts will have to concede the point to Gorsuch (who has the majority on his side now), but a fascinating insight into the Court, nonetheless.

More from Politics

1/ Imagine that as soon as the referendum result the EU announced that it was looking forward to the end of free movement of UK citizens in the EU


2/ Imagine if the EU said finally all those retired Brits in the EU27 could go home

3/ Imagine if the EU said finally all those Brits in the EU could stop driving down wages, taking jobs and stop sending benefits back to the UK

4/ Imagine if the EU said it was looking to use UK citizens as “bargaining chips” to get a better trade deal

5/ Imagine if the EU told UK citizens in the EU27 that they could no longer rely on established legal rights and they would have to apply for a new status which they have to pay for for less rights
This is partly what makes it impossible to have a constructive conversation nowadays. The stubborn refusal to accept that opposition to Trumpism and GOP nationalism is about more than simply holding different beliefs about things in and of itself. 👇


It's fine for people to hold different beliefs. But that doesn't mean all beliefs deserve equal treatment or tolerance and it doesn't mean intolerance of some beliefs makes a person intolerant of every belief which they don't share.

So if I said I don't think Trumpism deserves to be tolerated because it's just a fresh 21st century coat of cheap paint on a failed, dangerous 20th century ideology (fascism) that doesn't mean I'm intolerant of all beliefs with which I disagree. You'd think this would be obvious.

Another important facet. People who support fascist movements tend to give what they think are valid reasons for supporting them. That doesn't mean anyone is obliged to tolerate fascism or accept their proffered excuse.


Say you joined a neighborhood group that sets up community gardens and does roadside beautification projects. All good, right? Say one day you're having a meeting and you notice the President and exec board of this group are saying some bizarre things about certain neighbors.

You May Also Like

MDZS is laden with buddhist references. As a South Asian person, and history buff, it is so interesting to see how Buddhism, which originated from India, migrated, flourished & changed in the context of China. Here's some research (🙏🏼 @starkjeon for CN insight + citations)

1. LWJ’s sword Bichen ‘is likely an abbreviation for the term 躲避红尘 (duǒ bì hóng chén), which can be translated as such: 躲避: shunning or hiding away from 红尘 (worldly affairs; which is a buddhist teaching.) (
https://t.co/zF65W3roJe) (abbrev. TWX)

2. Sandu (三 毒), Jiang Cheng’s sword, refers to the three poisons (triviṣa) in Buddhism; desire (kāma-taṇhā), delusion (bhava-taṇhā) and hatred (vibhava-taṇhā).

These 3 poisons represent the roots of craving (tanha) and are the cause of Dukkha (suffering, pain) and thus result in rebirth.

Interesting that MXTX used this name for one of the characters who suffers, arguably, the worst of these three emotions.

3. The Qian kun purse “乾坤袋 (qián kūn dài) – can be called “Heaven and Earth” Pouch. In Buddhism, Maitreya (मैत्रेय) owns this to store items. It was believed that there was a mythical space inside the bag that could absorb the world.” (TWX)